We used to have frequent problems with false alarms associated with burning toast in our house. Until the toaster protocol was perfected, the false alarm solution was simple. To silence the alarm we had a three foot "shut-up stick" stored in the corner below the fire alarm. Whenever the toaster triggered the alarm, the nearest person would grab the stick and reset the alarm.

This experience clearly indicates the issues associated with devices that respond to user gestures. If I visit your house, how will I ever know what gestures may be misinterpreted? When we travel abroad, we get hints about inappropriate gestures in other cultures ... but I never expected to have to deal with the "culture" of the internet of things in such a manner.

Even once they solve the problem -by the time they add the hardware to recognize the gesture, the MTBF of that system will ALWAYS be inferior (reliability wise) to a system that is only as complex as it needs to be to meet its functional requirements.

There are many examples in home automation business a.k.a Internet of Things that belong to this category of products that attempt to solve the problems that don't exist...we should have a contest which idea is the most useless...I vote for an app that checks how many times your fridge was open in the last 24 hours...Kris

Could someone explain to me why we are in such a rush to remove switches from designs? This smoke alarm is a classic example of someone trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Your alarm goes off - open a window and fan the unit for about 10 seconds --- whallla! (or get on a chair and push the button). Is that so hard?

So, an advanced feature on a product that costs at least an order of magnitude more than its competitors from a company overvalued by several orders of magnitude doesn't work properly. Anyone want to buy one of my tulip bulbs?